Forum 3E7/3E8

yes i do agree, with you. Having a good healthcare system is issential for a countries economy to grow. If alot of people get sick. There wont be anyone to work thus having good health care system is important for every indivisual in singapore.

grace..since you say that the government doesn't listen to the citizen and you claim that we should leave singapore,then why are u still here?ironical right?as in...the government has a huge responsibility and you can't expect them to follow everything the citizen wants.im super sure that the govermnent knows what they are doing and we would somehow gain from it in the long run.

I have to disagree with you because by testing better health care means having better health care,people will tend to not get sick easily.Singapore health care will be much more advanced.The point here is not having to pay higher taxes.It is about having to keep healthcare in Singapore up to date.Does it mean that you won't have to pay higher taxes and stay with your current healthcare system?If that is so Singapore is doomed.Everyone will be sick and there will be no cure.For exmaple,if USA has a cure for AIDS,Singapore must not obtain that heathcare information?If u do testing and the results is good,Singapore has a additonal cure.I think you have interpret "MEANS-Testing" wrongly.

Wait...I got a question to ask to 3e8.if you think mean-testing is bad,what kind of solution do you suggest to this then?

hahaha, easy. The solution is: .... Don't use mean testing.

lol! but using mean-testing has more advantage than not using it.. so why not use it?:X

what are the advantages? you tell me.

getting help from the government(:

WE WERE GIVEN THE OPPOSITION SITUATION WHAT DO U EXPECT

Means-testing is to help those needy families so that they are able to pay their medical expenses.Therefore, we should put into consideration that they need to be look after too.Why can`t we just put a go to this policy?
All citizens should be treated fairly and those higher-income families should understand that it is not about who earn the better level of treatment, but it is about how everyone should be concern of each others` affordability. They are already categorised as an upper-class, so why should they feel that it is unfair when their healthcare are not subsidised? It is clearly shown that they can afford to pay their own medical expenses, so why should we hesitate to help the needy ones instead? Futhermore, it is the government who decides whether they are eligible for the scheme or not. So we have no rights to go against that decision, because i believe that the goverment`s decision will certainly be fair to each individual.
Therefore, i strongly agree that this policy is a good approach so as to manage healthcare in Singapore.

Erniyanti , what you have just said . "... it is the government who decides ... we have no rights to go against that decision..."
But you think about this , Singapore is a democratic country . The government should listen to the citizens comments as well . If we have no rights to go against that decision , then that will be not fair at all . And this shows that , so whatever we have said there is no point of saying . Then might as well leave this country , when the government does not take opinions from the people . People need to improve by having some comments . (: Thus , i do not agree that this policy is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore .
Thank you ! (:

Grace, it is evident that democracy is being embraced in Singapore in all ways and always.

It is needless to mention that 'The government should listen to the citizens comments as well' for the government has been and is always doing the best for the MAJORITY of its people.
Emphasis : MAJORITY! There is no unjust done, when the government decides one not being eligible for subsidies pertaining hospital expenses via means-testing. It is a reality check for those coming from higher income families, instead.

Likewise, the government helping those less fortunate in this case the lower and middle income families will definitely be beneficial. Via means testing, the government decides who is eligible for subsidies. if you are eligible help is given.

Looking at a bigger picture, aiding the majority of Singaporeans via subsidies and means-testing clearly shows that the government has a keen interest on its people welfare; MOST of its people welfare. Democracy is still embarced. Why deny greater good when it is certain to help MOST of us? Why being a stopper to such a policy when it is and will be benefiting the most at the end of the day?

Means testing is an investigative process whereby the government, decides and dictates one's eligibility and affordability for subsidies regarding hospital expenses. I trust the policy of means testing would be doing greater good for the MOST of us, hence i second the notion once again.

You seem to forget that the government does listen to our suggestions. Our government cares about their citizen's well-being and that is why they implemented mean-testing. Mean-testing refers to lower-income families getting help from the government. These people could not afford their medical fees, unlike those of higher-income. The government decided that to ensure their citizen's well-being, they should help those in need.
Singapore's government listens to people's opinions and suggestions. They then look at Majority's say and work on it, while ensuring that it is effective and for a good cause.
Take in Beveridge Report, for example. The government tried to help it's people but it was not beneficial for them. Their citizens took it for granted and the government had to suffer their loss.
Singapore's government is careful is their decisions. That is why I think that means-testing is a good approach in Singapore.

Grace, u mention that " If we have no rights to go against that decision , then that will be not fair at all .
And this shows that , so whatever we have said there is no point of saying ".
Well from my view, what if the citizens starts to get more stubborn, then the government will have to approve whatever the citizens has to complain about. When this happen, it will be the same as the British Welfare State. So in conclusion, the government has to make decision for the citizens of Singapore for better futures ahead.

i disagree with the sentence "All citizens should be treated fairly" as if you said everyone should be treated fairly they why should not the rich people get subsidies and only poor people could get subsidies then this is all not about fairness already.It does not mean that if a person could afford something he need to paid for its own.If a rich people can get subsidies they will always choose to be subsidies as this could help them save money.Example, if i have $1001 and i am staying in a the hospital then when i am out of the hospital the bills for me are $1000 that means that i could afford it but it does not means i need to paid all by myself and i will always prefer to be subsidies, as if i paid all the bills myself i will only be left with $1 so it is not fair that only the poor people can get subsidies while the rich cannot.

Without means-testing, the lower income families will only be able to afford C classes wards, while the higher income families will be able to stay in an A class ward that provides excellent healthcare service. The poorer families will never be able to afford healthcare services like this. This isn't fair. It doesn't mean that people with lower income have to be treated differently from the poeple with higher incomes. And recession. Nowadays, many workers get retrenched from their companies. When they fall ill, they don't have the money to stay in better wards. Sometimes, not even B class wards. Take this as an example: A factory worker got retrenched from his company. Because of the previous low salary, the retrenchment package provided is not good. If his son falls ill, he would have to check his son into a C class ward. Children are always more sensitive to germs and bacterias. His son may even get more sick when he comes in contact with other patients. If there's financial help, he might be able to send his son into a better ward and seek better treatment.
Therefore, I think means-testing is definitely necessary as it creates high benefits for the lower income families.

i totaly disagree with what you said as it is very reasonable as if the poor people can't afford to stay in the class A or B ward could only stay in the the class C ward this could only blame them for not studying well in school as if they study well they will be able to get a better job and if they cannot afford to stay in a class C ward so what is the point of subsidies them to stay in a class B ward this will only increase the amount paid by the paitients thus if they stay in a class C and subsidies is given out and the paitients will get a chance to paid lesser amount money thus if a paitients can get well after staying in the hospital what is the difference in staying in a class A or C ward.

What does studying well in school have any link to them getting a better job?
Okay, even if they do, haven't you heard of bosses who had graduated from ITE and striked big?
And, seriously i can't understand what you're typing, okay, "what is the point of subsidies them to stay in a class B ward" the government subsidies people to help them pay their hospital bills based on their economy status, so what does it got to do with the people being transfered to class b wards? "thus if a paitients can get well after staying in the hospital what is the difference in staying in a class A or C ward." are you in proposition? i can't understand what had you been typing. X:

But Michelle , think about this , then why should parents keep on urging us to study well ?! Is cause they want us to get a better job . Don't you agree with me ? i think your parents will also want you to study well . Lets' say if you study is not good , and you graduated from ITE and striked big . Then everybody can just don't study at all right ? So what is the point of studying at all !

Grace and WenXing, Don't get too carry with the 'education'.
The topic is Means-Testing is a good approach to manage healthcare.
This is nothing to do with Education.

This policy is to treat everybody equally.
Those people who can afford the expenses on medical should not feel that they are treated unfairly.As many of the people cannot afford the expenses due to recession. They should just spare a thought for the poor families.

But still , i don't agree that it is a good approach . If everyone should have just spare a thought for the poors , there will not be this problem at all . Many people cannot afford the expenses due to recession that can be understand . But they have to learn to how to cope with the situation , can't possibly keep on asking the government to help them . This cannot carry on , as i said earlier . Government's expenses got a limit to it . If continue like this , i think that the government cannot cope with it at all .

The scheme is only for elderly to determine whether he/she needs step-down care services.
The government will only provide elderly such as physically-disabled or homeless.

The government could also be able to help the lower income group to tide over the economy crisis.

Basically, the government will set a budget/funds in order not to exceed the national funds.
Thus, this is a good approach as it can help those needy and does not exceed.
If this scheme execute, the citizens will benefit alot.
(:

So you were trying to say that government only help the needys yeah ? And not everyone ? How about the others then ? They will be ignored by the government isn't that ? So i don't think it is a very good approach .
And if the elderly needs step-down care services and they do not have the money to afford , and they have no kids at all . They will still have to pay a sum of money even after subsidies those money . So what is the point there ? only just to reduce that few sum .. (: (: (:

Give it to a thought.

Example : -
One day you went to buy something, which cost $2.
But you only have $1.80 and you need it by that very moment.

So, put this example into this situation whereas the elderly need just that very few sum from the government to pay their fees.Means Testing can be used as an alternative measure for future increase/inflation in health care cost.There will also be a limit for the increase of healthcare cost, mean-testing will be another way to remain the premium affordable.

Thus, it is a good approach.

Since most of you have posted your views which had nothing to do with means test, you people all those reasons that people can't afford or can afford or abusing subsidised health care. I'll post my view.

As you may have read my previous post of the meaning of means test. As its name implies, its a test, a test whether you can qualify for help from the government, help as in subsidised health care such as MediSave, MediFund. The point here is qualify, means test is a complex test and for healthcare? Pointless.

If it is used for bankruptcy like in the USA, it can be considered to be implemented here or in the UK, payments for workers but in the UK means testing is not very accepted. So now, yes medical fees can be expensive depending on the patient. EVERYONE should get healthcare subsidies no need for tests for whether they can qualify, it only will anger the public and most probably the next election would not go well for the ruling party before just because of this ridiculous approach.

I've stated my opposition. Feel free to reply.

I agree to a large extent that Means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore.

Singapore comprises the upper class, middle class and the lower class. Singaporeans being subjected to such a policy would aid those; in these case definitely the lower income families who cannot afford medical and surgical treatments. Denying someone who really comes from a lower income family of the rights of having subsidies, would be doing unjust. For instance a young boy coming from a lower income group; who has neither a CPF nor a Med shield should be helped by the government via subsidies. By repudiating the rights of having subsidized treatments or anything pertaining to medical issues, is being immoral and inhumane.

Why do we have to disallow such a policy from being happening when it certainly will aid those who really cannot afford hospital expenses? Is it fair for those to be in misery for not being able to afford treatments as such, because upper-class-people’s affordability is being put to stake by the government?
Via means – testing, if the government decides that one is able to afford hospital expenses and need not be subsidized, why go against it if the government itself makes a decision after thorough reviews of one’s finance status. It is indeed a reality check for those upper-class-people-who-still-thinks-that-they-need-to-be-subsidized! It is the GOVERNMENT scheming people into categories where the GOVERNMNENT thinks you are not eligible for subsidies or not.

Regarding views about how people with higher income are required to pay higher income tax and how it is unfair for them as they receive lesser medical subsidies. In Singapore, the living standards are high. If one belongs to an upper class, definitely one would have to pay a higher income tax. It is a standard living protocol in Singapore. Via means-testing, if the government dictates that one can afford without getting subsidies or with lesser subsidies, why take it as a con? Looking at the bright side, the amount from the government is helping some other fellow Singaporean who cannot afford medical expenses.

Helping one in need of misery is virtuous.
Why deny benefits for others who are REALLY IN NEED OF HELP during REAL CRISIS?

First thing first, most of you got it wrong. Means test refers to an investigative process undertaken to determine whether or not an individual or family is eligible to qualify for help from the government.

It is not a good approach as, it causes a lot of resentment in other countries such as United Kingdom, it gave rise to National Unemployed Workers' Movement. As payments by the government are means-tested, meaning that the entitlement to it is affected by the amount of income and savings.

Also, means test in United States for bankrupt people to pay some of their debts although its complex its quite generous and most debtors are able to meet its requirements. Some called it unfair.

So for Singapore to have such a approach would not be advisable as people would like it, and cause resentment, as people are not used to this kind of policy.

But still what if the families really cannot afford the medical fees.When comes to healthcare,do other people really still talk about fairness??Afterall it concerns about people's life and death...if families are able to pay,it is good but what about those that cannot afford??Are they going to sit there and wait death??
I dun think so,most properly,they would get help.With the means test,they can get the money they need to undergo medical treatment.

You're saying what all the others are. Where's your evidence? And means test has nothing to do whether people can afford or not. It is whether they can qualify to get healthcare service which are subsidised

By doing so, it affects the people in the middle and lower class as they are fighting with the upper class for space in the Class WArd B and C.From this example, which is an evidence of means testing being there with good purpose, mean testing help the government to understand how much to subsidise by income group.In addition, i would like to bring out this point that in every policy made, it is made by a human, and to err is human. therefore we can't allow this policy to please everyone.however if this policy benefits a large number of group, it should be consider a good policy.We have more people from the middle class and lower class. .therefore it benefits them more.

You have a point. Upper class Singaporeans would automaticly take class A wards, why would they take class B and C if they can afford class A easily? If those high class Singaporeans take the lower class wards which are subisidised, they can't. Like for HDB, those with higher income cannot buy normal HDB flats.

So means testing is a bit pointless in managing healthcare in this case, as all those policies are already there, mean testing to to investigate whether they qualify to get subsidised healthcare, as lower income Singaporeans are automaticly put in lower class wards unless they want higher class wards.

So there you go. Feel free to reply.

But if the family cannot even get into the lower class wards as they dont even have the money....then means-test would help alot.....

But think about it , if they cannot even get into the lower class wards as they don't have the money then how would they get treatment ? (:

That why they need to get money fom the government through mean-testing.....that way they then will get the money to undergo treatment.....

But think about this , what if the people without the good intentions ? they will just take the money to gamble away and use on necessary stuffs right ?

Then are you going to deny the chance for other people to get the money just because a a handful of people are going to gamble.....And also dun you think that the government would not thought of this point...perhaps they would just pay the money directly to the hospital for the patient.If this is the way,even if the people is without good intention,the money also wont be wasted.....

The government don't give you money. They subsidise your medical fees. For those who can't afford at all, what the hell are the charities for?

Even if there are charities,there are for other causes.How many charities do you think are set-up for people to get their medical fees free or susidies?And if they process the request,how long do you think they will take??Eventually when the person get the money,would it be too late already??

There are tons of charities don't need to worry. How big is Singapore? They are even hospitals built just for charity uses and polyclinics. Not only that, what's the community centers for? Of course people will volunteer to help lessen the burden.

And for the request thing, they just see your income, your house and how many children you have, that's all. That's how the pocket money fund is processed, how you get free textbooks and so on. Easy. You think half the population is poor? Come on. At most, the process will take a week or two.

But now we are undergoing ressusion,so how many people do you think are going to donate money.Even if they have money,i think they would rather help themselves than to help others.....

Wrong spelling should be recession instead.....

Firstly, the situation for UK and US may not be applicable to Singapore as both examples cited are both western countries and the mindsets of people are different. Moreover Singapore is not a welfare state unlike UK. Therefore, this would force Singaporeans to work and support themselves. Means-testing in Singapore would only make sure that the more needy Singaporeans would be able to find help in times of need.

I'm not saying that the mean testing in US and UK to be appclicable here, i'm just stating examples for how mean testing can be used. Sure the mindset is different, but right now is about healthcare and mean testing is to whether they can qualify to get the subsidised healthcare.

Needy Singaporeans get help from charities. Subsidised healthcare is to help those middle class and lower class and those needy singaporeans to afford healthcare. For the needy, since their getting charity plus subsidies their expenditure would about the same of those in the middle and lower class.

So mean testing for these needy people is pointless. First, they already have charities, 2nd, healthcare is already subsidised. and finally why bother testing them whether they can qualify? as long their singaporean they should get the best healthcare.

However, it is still for the greater good of society that mean-testing is being carries out so that the government could allocate its assistance in medical fees appropriately. Moreover, not everyone, especially those from the middle and lower class standards of soiecty would be aware of and know how to approach help from charities. Therefore, mean-testing is necessary to both ensure that the assistance given is appropriate and also that the needy would be able to get the financial support they need.

I strongly oppose this statement. Means-testing is not a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore. We know that medical expenses are very expensive in Singapore. The government should give everyone a fair subsidy for all citizens. They can’t judge the people who are being admitted in hospital with them income from work or from their housing there are living in. Some people might live in smaller houses have low income but they might be doing business with other people and have oversea property. It’s not fair in giving more subsidies to less income patients and giving less to those who can afford the medical expenses.

there are many financial problems affecting singapores healthcare. the grade/class wards. The A wards would be more helpful for the patients health, by having privacy, air conditioning, better food and many more. besides, the employers pay for part of the fees, insurance, taxes. so i dont think finance is a big problem. GUILTY GUILTYgear x

is this related to the topic ? The employers do pay for part if it , but the people will still have to pay too .

I disagree with you becuase many people could buy ward b or c rather than a beacuse it could save money and electricity which would be helpful to conserve our resources so please read the notion correctlyand answer the question.

ashik,he say he DISAGREE that its is NOT good. re read and understand it is the same as saying that he agrees that it is good.

srry i put it wrong place.

i disagree that means-testing is not a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore.Not all of the Singaporeans could afford medical healthcare so if the government checks and knows, the government will give subsidies to the people who needed more.Singaporeans than can take good care of their health more.

Syazwan please note that you are suppost to agree with the notion and not disagree so please re check your statment and reply your answer to the notion and thanks for your answer asainst your proposition it would be useful for your help.

ashik,he say he DISAGREE that its is NOT good. re read and understand it is the same as saying that he agrees that it is good.

I agree with brandon's view.
and replying to Amanda's view, you said that the poor might take the money and gamble it away, true, BUT have you thought that they would want themselves to be healthy rather than to have a chance to lose it all away? AND the 'not-so-rich' people can also apply for the subsidies, only that the government pays a lesser percentage for them.
Those that live in the 'A-class' wards are those that can afford to live in an 'A-class' ward, like the example you gave, about the rich entrepreneur, he could ask for a transfer or something, but which company would be so heartless to retrench their own 'higher-ups' when they could have the brains to come up with a solution to help their company earn money?

But do you ever think of that , there are such people that will take the money and gamble all away instead of using it wisely to pay the medical bills etc.

You mentioned that "the 'not-so-rich' people ... pays a lesser percentage for them." - but what if many of people trying to fake saying that they are not very rich and they "NEED" money ? Government will have to pay more isn't that true ? We are now facing recession problems , and need to save more money . Government money is limited too , will be finished soon . So if the government kept on giving out money , then i think Singapore will soon be gone as well .

i do believe that the government would check their background before they would actually give them the money.And also people cannot fake their background,as such i do agree that means-testing is a good apporach to manage healthcare in singapore.

regarding what Linda menioned, people with higer income are required to pay higher income tax. So, it is unfair to them as they recive lesser medical subsidies.

Linda , even the government do check their backgrounds , but you have to think about this .
If those people is not very rich , and they will get more money from the government isn't that ?
And some people who do not have the good intentions will tends to misuse the money instead .
Don't you agree too ? (:

agreed

But that is because they have higher income and they themselves can afford the medical fees.

Linda the government only give money for certain reasons like now it is recession and singaporeans are getting fired but do you think the goverment give money no because some of the families have money in their bank account. So the goverment no need to worry for them but some families don't have enough saving and are almost bankrupt so the goverment help them by giving some money to support their families. So Linda please think back and understand the question.

i dun think that the goverment is only giving money to ppl because it is recession.But mostly is because some families are not able to pay their to pay their medical fees...because it is too expensive.Even if they really do have money in their account,what if the money cannot cover the medical fees?Obivously the practical way is to get help,as such i do believe that means-testing is a good approach

From wad u said " but what if many of people trying to fake saying that they are not very rich and they "NEED" money ? " . This i do not agree with u as goverment knows how much each of the family income. The gorvenment will check wether that they are rich or poor, through a form asking how much is the family income. If they happened to say fake income or lower income than usual , the government will know , that family will be sued.

So what if the government really do check about the backgrounds . They still can misuse the money elsewhere too .
Think about this , people with lower income they might get more money . And they may use it to buy other things instead of those necessary stuffs . Don't you agree too ? As you know , Singaporeans are mostly the type who are "KIA SU" .(sorry for using singlish). People might help each other to fake a false statement for CPF ? E.G , you ask the boss of yours to put as $1500 , but you earned more than that . It is already faking a false statement . If the governement know , the family will be sued , then what about the Boss ?! (:

I strongly oppose to the notion.Lets say if there were two men,one with a family and one without.The man without a family earns 2000 and applies for a c class ward.The man with a family applies for a c class ward.He is the sole breadwinner of the family and earns 5000.After spending money on his wife and children and basic households needs,he is left with 2000.Now both these men get subsides but the man who gets the 2000 dollar salary clearly pays much less,while the other man higher.This is clearly not fair as the man with the family has more responsibilites and thus may have less to spend for himself.Any means spending should look at the persons entire background before offering a subside.

Firstly, i do not agree with my fellow oppostition partner, Zane as he keep on mentioning about reverse-means testing but this is NOT TRUE.This is because if you upgrade all charges,except daily ward fee will be backdated.Do not be confused with means testing and reverse testing, they are 2 different things.

he is only trying to say that "the outcome of means testing may be akin to “reverse means testing” "
Even if we upgrade the things , is cause that we wanted better services and better treatment ! So there is no wrong . And if you wanted to say that Medishield can subsidies the medical bills but not all .

When u said that means-testing is a burden, u must think what about those family with financial burden. Those family do not even have the capital to seek help from a private hospital. from my opinion, i do not think that hospital in Singapore will treat the richer one in a better condition while the poor is unattended. With "Means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore, financial burden family will not have to worry about the hospital's bill, if anyone in their family has to be in hospital for quite some times. Therefore, Means-testing is a good choice.

But where or who will the money saved go to? Will MediShield coverage be improved or its premiums reduced? Will more accessible financial schemes be launched to help those in that are in need?

So what is the point of means-testing, when all the money saved do not benefit anyone?
The government might as well subsidise all the citizens equally in this case...

Lets take it for example, my mother's friend A went through an operation and she could not afford the high cost of getting into a better ward hence she took the 'Class C' and another of my mother's friend took the 'Class B' as his income was higher than 'friend A'. You can say that the difference between class A and B does not have much difference effect or impact but when it comes to service it would a big grap.
I know that we are talking about how "MEANS-TESTING HELPS THE FINANCIAL BURDEN A FAMILY IS FACING". BUT DO NOT FORGET that we are also paying for the cost of ward of the services that the hospital is giving.

I strongly oppose to this notion.



Let's say,if I were once a rich entrepreneur, and lived in the 'A class' ward.
But the recent recession caused me to lose my job.
Does that mean that I still have to enter the 'A class' ward and still pay for something I cannot afford anymore?
Yes, indeed it works this way in Singapore.


Means testing refers generally to the eligibility for relief for debtors who have sufficient financial means to pay a portion of their debts.
But it seems to me that the Government aren't helping the not-so-rich people in Singapore.
Yes, they may seem rich or a little rich, but they are actually affected, also, by the recession.

Furthermore, no subsidies or means are given offered to people in the "A class' wards.
Hence, it is really unfair if the "A class wards" pays double or more than those in the B and C class ward patients.
Also, if the poor has this mindset that, even if they fall sick, it wouldn't be a problem because the government would eventually offer them subsidies and means, it would be disastrous.
It is because they would not take good care of themselves. And some may even misuse the sum of money given to them, either gamble them away or spend it unnecessarily.
All these eventually leads to many other problems.

Hence, I don't think that the means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore.

It is true that means-testing is needed to manage healthcare in Singapore. Since this measure benifits the needys, it should be useful to those elderly or non-working familys. This also help to reduce resources to help those who really needs help and not to those who can still manage it.

But you have to think of this point . What if some people misuse the measure benefits to the needys how ? Then the government will have to use more resources instead . So how can it help to reduce the resources ? I don't think that there is a need for means-testing .

means-testing is a reallocation of burden, not a solution.

If the objective of moving richer patients to better wards is achieved, it will lead to overcrowding in Class A and B1 wards. If the increased demand for these better wards is not met by public hospitals, patients will probably seek treatment at private hospitals, whose charges will go up. Demand will still exceed the supply.

in other words, you are not solving the problem; you are just transfering the problem to elsewhere.

Means-testing will help the less fortunate family to able to cope with the health care.Everyone can afford the medical treatment and decrease the possibilties of disease spreading.This also allow the people to be more focus on their work and they may be promote.This will let thoes who cannot afford to get a larger subsidies

What?!

"This also allow the people to be more focus on their work and they may be promote." What has promotion got to do with this?Shouldn't these lower income group work harder to earn more and repay the government instead of giving them a large subsidy?

If you were one of the higher income group and something happens. You need to pay a large amount of money while your friend which is part of the lower income group has to pay lesser for the same treatment. Wouldn't you feel unhappy and find it unfair? You may say yes,it benefits the financially weak group but if you belong to the other. Would you still be thinking the same way?

i do agree with greta on the fact that patients can use their medisave and medishield to pay for their bills but there are still Singaporeans who cannot afford to pay for their medical bills despite having the policy as they do not have enough funds in their medisave. Moreover,some self-employed people do not make any CPF contributions and thus do not have medisave.

I agree that some people don't have contributions but they could compain to the gover ment and ask for CPF contributions but please think what you have said has there is no such thing that people don't have medisave because every citizen when they get their CPF they must have a medisave account if not how could they be able to go for sugeries and operations. but i colud agree that when the old people age above 75 may not have enough money for their medisave has they are not able to work at a old age.

larger subsidies all the time.

if they are always given larger subsidies, then they'll have a mind set that they can go for medical treatment etc.etc often kos they can now afford them thanks to the govenmrnt and then from here when ever they fall ill eventhough its a minor cough or sore throat they can just seek for medical treatment and be excuesd from wrok, and from here they think they won't need to work any harder to gain more alowence but to just depend on the government. and the when they keep falling sick and not coming to work they'll get kicked out of their jobs, so the jobs are given to the foreign workers who needs the money and who are not as UNHEALTHY as the locals who usually thinks they can afford a medical leave and from here the people who loose their jobs are facing more financial burden and then theyll start to complain that why is it so hard for us the locals to get a job but are given to the foreigners and complain complain complain and isint this another problem for the citizens? and this cycle goes on and on so they'll have to REALIZE that they have to work harder and not slack slack slack slcak slack slack slack!!!!!!!!!!!

I beg to differ the notion made.

If Means-testing is a good approach,why do we have a need to debate on this?Giving the lower income more subsidies is showing unfairness in the society since Singapore is a Free and Fair country. Everyone should be treated equally.Though the higher income families are able to pay up,It does not show in any way why they cannot have an equal amount of subsidy.

In conclusion,what is the point of having this debate when everyone only thinks about the lower income?So therefore,means-testing is not a good approach.It will only stir unfairness to the higher income families.

I do not agree that means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore. Even thogh it helps to ease the financial burden of the citizens but there are many other criterias in order for them to be able to be eligible for such a service. For example ,number of family members is taken into consideration. What does the number family members got to do with the finacially aid that the government is providing? This will cause more trouble to the citizens in order to be able to qualify and they will have more burden.

I agree with sarah but please note that the number of people in the family and the money they get is divided to each of them so you must noe that one person in the family could even raise the family expenses.

i agree that means-tesing is a good approach as it helps the lower income family so that they could afford medical benefits. This will mean that almost all Singaporean now could afford healthcare.Without this means-testing, the government will not know if the patients could not assor medical health care and this will lead to a rise of sick people who cannot afford medical health care and this will be a probelm for the government.In addition, subsidies provided from the government for people who needed the most will ease the financial burden to them and take care of their health.

And this may also mean that they would always go for medical chekups for mc's and by this they will spend lesser time at work, and it may arise another problem because lesser people are attending work and it may cause retrenchment, and that will be another burden to the citizens.

I don't think it is perfect idea to use the means-testing to manage the healthcare in Singapore . In hospitals there is A ward , B ward , C ward etc., and patient who is not supposely to be qualified for the lower class will ended up paying more .

But do they ever think of the point that , an example , if my mother is quite rich , and my grandmother is very poor and she got to pay the fees of the hospital bills herself instead of my mother paying for it . And she was not being qualified for the lower class due to that my mother is rich . She will end up paying more isn't it ? And is that fair for her ? Even using the help of Medishield or Medisave , she still have to pay a lot . So overall , i don't think it is a good choice of using the means-testing in Singapore .

I disagree with grace. In your point of view, if your mother is rich and your grandmother isn't and end up, have to pay more, right? You think that it is unfair. Look, if your grandmother is poor and your mother is not, which is like so impossible, your mother will pay for HER hospital bills. right right? (:

And, you think that it is unfair. Do you ever think that there is more unfairness and that we have to somehow prioritise them. And not think that that is unfair. Being poor and paying those expensive hospital bills is something more unfair. They don't even have money to pay! While on the other hand, from your example, as repeated, there are at least someone related that can afford the bills. Thank you.

But you see , i was trying to say that the other family member is not FILIAL enough . She won't help to pay for all the expenses at all how ? My grandmother will still have to pay for her own right ?

Take it as , my grandmother only have my mother the only daughter . And she is not willing to pay for my grandmother's hospital bills all that how ? She have to pay all alone also . RIGHT ? {: Seriously , it is not really fair at all .

And you said "Being poor and paying those expensive hospital bills is something more unfair. They don't even have money to pay!" So you agree with me too right ? (: So , my grandmother don't even have the money to pay , so it isn't fair at all .

Ah ah, means testing takes consideration of the number of family members.

But you think of this , if really taking the consideration of the number of members , she will still have to pay that much then how ? She also can't afford right . (: And still , i think it is not fair ! :D

Pamella,I refer to your statement "Being poor and paying those expensive hospital bills is something more unfair."

Yes,it's not anyone's fault for being poor but there are government hospitals that offers great service at a cheaper bill. There's also different type of wards like the "c" ward which is the cheapest.In addition,these Patients could use their medisave and medishield to pay for their bills. It's impossible if it's not enough to pay for the bill unless it is a terminal disease that requires long term medication.

Such cases have the insurance companies to cover for them.So can you please tell me,in what ways are they eligible to for this Subsidy?

Firstly my opposition member zane said that lower income or who live in HDB flats, may all have to pay higher premiums, to in a sense, subsidise richer Singaporeans who fail means testing. However,higher-income citizens will get a smaller subsidy, and will have to pay more.So everyone is treated equally right?

Now let me start my point of view.Means-testing is definitely a good approach to healthcare. An example of means-testing is the MOE financial assistant scheme which is no doubt,helpful to so many students financially needed.So many students have benefited and can concentrate better because they know that they are being helped by this scheme so it is definitely a good approach.

I would like to end my point of view with a question that the opposition should take into consideration if means-testing is not a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore as what the opposition are saying then why is means-testing one of the top three areas in Singapore's health sectors?

I do not agree with Arvin as i think he is wrong as he said that the MOE financial assistant scheme is helpful to many students, but not to all the students only to the students whose family income is 2000 dollars or lesser. Besides that, it may encourage the families income which is lesser than 2000 or 2000 to find a job that has not so much workload as they know that they will get some money from the government and think THAT THEY DO NOT NEED TO WORK SO HARD ANYMORE

i agreed with Joel . As some parents may think that , they no need to work so much , and they can also get money from government . So might as well , they reduce their workload , and not get so much pay , so that they can get more money from the government . And , the students or the child may get into the wrong idea . When they grown up , they will think that , they do not have the need to work so much then they can receive money from the government . This led to a wrong idea .

i totally disagree with joel as it is just a stereotype that some parents may think that they do not need to work so mucj when they can get money from the government.Joel also said that the M.O.E scheme only help those students whose family income less than $2000. OBVIOUSLY! why would the government help those who are not financially needed?

Some people just do not like to work, it is proven in brittany already

Well i don't agree with what had my proposition Arvin had said about the MOE financial education scheme because in singapore most of the students parents are educated and they earn enough to support their family and are able to afford buying books for their children. Even though as you said that the MOE financial assistant scheme is useful, the financial assistant scheme is for lower income family who only could earn less than $1500 for 2 children and less than $1800 for 3 or more children. In Singapore almost 85% of the families are able to live and earn enough to pay for all the bills and other neccessary thing while only 15% are able to use the amount to support their familiy needs. So my point of view is that the MOE financial assistant is not so effective on students education Therefore i here by end my view.Please also take in consideration that even though the means -testing is one of the top three areas in Singapore, do yuo think is effective on the citizens of Singapore

Ashik is totally wrong. He and the whole oppostion team should take into consideration that a scheme does not need to be ranked top or best to prove that it is effective on the citizens.Mean testing being ranked 3rd shows it is very efficient.Look at the bright side.And Ashik also mentioned that in Singapore most student's parents are educated but now we are talking as a whole not most.

So what it is being ranked 3rd ? We are having debating means that there is still some problems unsolved . And the problem is that means-testing is not a good approach to manage the healthcare in Singapore . Think about it , the government will helped those who are really in the need of financial help . But some of them , do you think that they really have the good intentions ? I doubt so .

And , if everyone is looking at the bright side , then this scheme is not a good approach at all ! (:

i totally agree with Grace....though the government is helping those who is in need of financial help,some took advantage of it..

"But some of them , do you think that they really have the good intentions ?"
no...some have other intention rather than really want help...

my conclusion is..this scheme is not a good approach..

Ok maybe i might be wrong but even though you say that the means testing is effective but it is safe for the Singaporeans

people without good intentions are just trying to take the money and spend elsewhere . You will never know .

this is good.there, i tagged. means testing does help helthcare in singapore. i agree with zhenwei my views are the same as his and the facts r very true

I disagree that means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore as the is cost involved is alot more,as those people suffering from terminal diseases face a huge medical bill.For those who suffer from chronic diseases,may be enjoying a certain income level,however,they will have their savings wiped out and have little monthly income to support their medical needs.If,due to the policy of means-testing,they have to pay more money for healthcare,then the government's effort in encouraging giving birth to babies would be in vain if families feel that they have to suffer increased liabilities in meeting healthcare needs of their children.

You have not answered my question. Why would the people need to pay more, if they are the ones being given subsidies?

Well,there are certain criterias to meet before you are given a subsidy.Subsidies are only given to elderly people who are Singapore citizens or Permenant Residents.They also have to meet the admission criteria of the step-down care services required,and they have to be admitted to government insitutions and services.If,the people do not meet these criterias,they would not be given a subsidy and will need to pay more,would you not agree?

I believe that means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in singapore as it help the lower income citizen, because without this means-testing, the rich will have to pay the same as the poor, which is unfair,because not all the poor people can afford to pay for the health care.Therefore, but not all the poor people can afford to pay for the health care.Therefore, means-testing is a good approach.

I strongly disagree with that means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in singapore as in my view, premiums will increase across the board for the entire population, because of the impracticality and inequity of charging higher yearly premiums for higher income Singaporeans or those who live in private property, even before a hospitalisation claim arises.And also without the means-testing the richer citizens would have to pay more,which mean that it is very unfair.why the richer citizens does not get that much subsidies from the government?They are all singaporeans but they are not treated the same.it does not means that the richer people had to pay more to the government but not the poor.
On the other hand, our present “subsidy-based approach” may be the root cause why more people are choosing lower class wards, as it may be perceived as getting higher “subsidies”, which even if lost to some extent or entirely due to means testing, is still always lower than if one selected a higher ward instead.By having these healthcare systems,citizens tends to choose a lower ward as to get more subsidy,therefore,singaporeans tends to be more dependent on the government.

For example,If the costs of providing a hospitalisation stay is $ 1,000, and the state subsidy is $ 800, all patient’s bills will reflect $ 200. Those who are poor, then go through a means test to determine whether they pay less or nothing at all.
In contrast, our present system bills patients $ 1,000, showing a subsidy of $ 800. Those who fail means testing, then has to pay back some or all of the $ 800 subsidy.
Therefore,i concluded that means-testing is nmot a good approach to manage the healtcare in singapore.

As the government understood that the healthcare services in Singapore was found hard to deal with, the government has set up measures such as Medishield and Medisave which allows citizens to use their MediShield to cover a part of their hospital bills. This, in my opinion, helped to ease the financial burden, as what my fellow classmate has said, to the citizens of Singapore. This is an effective measure including the elderly as they can use their MediShield to cover for their hospital expenses.

I do not believe that means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore.As the outcome of means testing may be akin to “reverse means testing”, as the majority who are lower income or who live in HDB flats, may all have to pay higher premiums, to in a sense, subsidise richer Singaporeans who fail means testing.

I do not see why the majority with lower income have to pay higher premiums. Do explain.

Also, you copied this from : https://www.myapplemenu.com/singapore/2008/01/

I believe means-testing is a good approach to manage healthcare in Singapore. If this approach was not taken, everyone would qualify for help from the government. Some Singaporeans are unable to pay for their medical expenses, with means-testing, they will get help from the government and subsidies may be given. This will ease the financial burden of these people, and at the same time, be able to keep healthy.

by subsidising the people with lower income, they will tend to relay on the government more, thus, they will not bother to take care of their own health properly.

In conclusion, means-testing is not a good approach at all.

not only that, not all can qualify as you said it is a test. A rather complicated test at that.

Not only will they rely on the government, they will tend to slack more. They will be thinking "since the governments are subsidising my medical bill, what for should i work so hard?" And also, if more and more patients turn up at the hospital for medication, government have to subsidise more. But the problem is, where does the money come from? The citizens. That means the gorvenment will be collecting higher tax. Than what is the point of subsidising if the citizens have to pay higher tax? People are already that poor and u are charging them higher tax. All this are cause by subsidising of medical bills.

haha hong yang said it. Read his reply properly before rebutting.